I have seen strange results on ftp (usually) with files around key values (128/256/512 bytes) and possibly continuing that pattern.
paul On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 11:22 AM, Henrik Holst <henrik.ho...@millistream.com> wrote: > Well I think that we can rule out the server because it seams to do this > the correct way. > > I created an "empty" file just the size of which a signed 32-bit integer > would have troubles with: > > henrik@ubuntu:~$ truncate --size 2147483648 Fedora-16-i386-DVD.iso > > I then turned on capture in Wireshark and told wget to do a resume: > > henrik@ubuntu:~$ wget -c " > http://mirrors.kernel.org/fedora/releases/16/Fedora/i386/iso/Fedora-16-i386-DVD.iso > " > > Now looking at the HTTP request in Wireshark I can see that my version of > Wget sends the correct range in order to resume the download: > > GET /fedora/releases/16/Fedora/i386/iso/Fedora-16-i386-DVD.iso HTTP/1.0 > *Range: bytes=2147483648- * > User-Agent: Wget/1.12 (linux-gnu) > Accept: */* > Host: mirrors.kernel.org > Connection: Keep-Alive > > And I can also see that the server does respond in a correct manner: > > HTTP/1.1 206 Partial Content > Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 22:14:09 GMT > Server: Apache/2.2.22 (Fedora) > Last-Modified: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 03:18:38 GMT > ETag: "276805c0-e2e0b000-4b0cc0b679f80" > Accept-Ranges: bytes > *Content-Length: 1658892288 > Content-Range: bytes 2147483648-3806375935/3806375936 * > Keep-Alive: timeout=5, max=1000 > Connection: Keep-Alive > Content-Type: application/x-iso9660-image > > That of course only takes us half-way the problem since we also must ensure > that wget fseeks to the correct position and that the server sends from the > correct position (another fseek) but that I will not try tonight since the > complete download of that file will take 6h for me and I have no time for > that at the moment :( > > Of course seeing a capture of the above using the 32-bit windows version > that JD uses would be quite interesting. > > /HH > > 2012/3/19 Micah Cowan <mi...@cowan.name> > >> On 03/19/2012 01:13 PM, JD wrote: >> > I am sorry - >> > Range requests?? >> > How can I see that when I run wget -c ???? >> > You're asking for info I am at a loss as to how to obtain. >> >> Sorry, I was slipping into potential technical explanations. You don't >> need to know what ranged requests are. >> >> As long as you follow the steps I outlined earlier (checking the point >> where the corruption happens, and runnin wget with the --debug flag on >> (so it gets as much information about what's going on as possible), we >> should be able to help you figure out what's going on. >> >> But again, first try a couple different builds of wget if you can, so we >> can eliminate the possibility that you just got your hands on a bad build. >> >> -mjc >> >>